Legal Opinion
Ray v. Allergan, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided June 1, 2012No. Civil Action No. 3:10CV136PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ROBERT E. PAYNE, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on DEFENDANT’S RULE 59 MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL (Docket No. 227), filed by Defendant Allergan, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Allergan”).1 For the reasons set forth below, DEFENDANT’S RULE 59 MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL (Docket No. 227) will be granted.
BACKGROUND
1. Factual Background
Plaintiff, Douglas M. Ray, Jr. (“Plaintiff’ or “Ray”), filed this action against Allergan after he received three BOTOX® injections between January through July 2007 to treat a dystonic movement disorder of his right hand. Am. Compl. ¶2.…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Boley v. Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2023
- Carpenter v. PerryDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 2023
- Sardis v. Overhead Door CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2020